DeerBuilder.com
RGS supports young forests
Wisconsin
Contributors to this thread:
Naz 08-May-15
Novemberforever 08-May-15
razorhead 09-May-15
Drop Tine 09-May-15
razorhead 09-May-15
Drop Tine 09-May-15
Zinger 09-May-15
Drop Tine 10-May-15
Zinger 10-May-15
Drop Tine 10-May-15
razorhead 10-May-15
Zinger 10-May-15
From: Naz
08-May-15
May 8, 2015

RUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY PETITIONS U.S. FOREST SERVICE TO SUSTAIN YOUNG FOREST HABITAT

RGS has filed a legal challenge to compel the Forest Service to follow the law.

The Ruffed Grouse Society (RGS) has filed a Petition for Rulemaking with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service) due to the agency’s consistent failure to provide the young forest habitats required by the ruffed grouse, American woodcock, golden-winged warbler and other game and nongame wildlife on national forests throughout the eastern United States.

“The failure of national forests in Regions 8 and 9 to meet even their own minimum goals for young forest habitats has contributed to substantial declines in the populations of game and nongame wildlife that depend upon these habitats.” said RGS President and CEO John Eichinger. According to Ryan Woody, an attorney representing RGS on the Petition from the firm of Matthiesen, Wickert and Lehrer, S.C., “The failure of the U.S. Forest Service to sustain young forest habitats sufficient to support viable populations of ruffed grouse and other wildlife that require these habitats on the Chattahoochee (GA), Hoosier (IN) and Sumter (SC) National Forests is a clear violation of regulations promulgated under the National Forest Management Act.”

On other national forests in the east, wildlife populations that thrive only in young forests continue to decline. For example, the Wayne National Forest in Ohio has established only 2 percent of the young forest acreage identified as a minimum goal in its forest plan. The Jefferson National Forest in Virginia has established only 12 percent of the young forest acreage identified as a minimum goal, while the Cherokee National Forest in Tennessee has established only 13 percent.

“From the heart of ruffed grouse country in the Great Lakes region, to the historic covers of New England and the hills of the Appalachians, ruffed grouse and other wildlife of young forests have been poorly served by the Forest Service. RGS takes this step reluctantly, but has little alternative due to the Forest Service’s lack of response to our repeated efforts to work collaboratively,” continued Eichinger. “These deficiencies indicate a systemic problem that demands the attention of our most senior officials within the Forest Service.”

08-May-15
My son is on the road with usfw mist netting, banding and geochipping endangered goldwing, bluewing and hybrid warblers from tn to winnipeg now. 3 teams, 10 weeks, $75,000 in geochips alone.They need young forests to breed/ nest while the south anerican winterrange mature canopy is being clearcut. Funny how the warbler could get the feds to fire up logging and get rid of the walden woods mentality. Ps ,deer prefer young forest also.

From: razorhead
09-May-15
I have said this all my life, not hard to figure out......

The anti hunting agenda of the feds, went well with too much of old growth..... they knew it,,,,,,

I have also said, if you are truly a deer hunter, than the #1 organization to belong to and contribute to is the RGS.

ITS ALL ABOUT HABITAT

From: Drop Tine
09-May-15
RGS is Anti trapping and supports stricter trapping regulations. The latest attack is on the trappers in MN.

From: razorhead
09-May-15
Please show me that. I am a trapper, and have been involved in RGS projects, and have never heard any negative about trapping......

I would like to know about this, it would be a serious issue for me, that I would like to know about.....

I will see gary zimmer next week, a biologist for RGS, so I would like to know, send me a pm if that is more comfortable for you

From: Drop Tine
09-May-15

Drop Tine's Link

From: Zinger
09-May-15
DT how do you see that as being anti-trapping? They are asking that laws that require trappers to place body gripping (Conibear) traps in such a way that less dogs get caught in them. This sounds pro-common sense not anti-trapping. I think anybody who hunts with dogs would like to see less dogs caught in traps as would any responsible trapper.

Fire used to be the main factor in making sure there was enough young growth for a varied habitat but man no longer allows fires to burn. Forestry replaced fires but now the tree huggers think it's wrong to cut any tree. Go walk through a true mature forest and you will see very few animals. Now walk through a 20 year old forest and you will see every animal imaginable. But I'm not saying anything we don't all already know.

From: Drop Tine
10-May-15
It's one user group supporting restricting another. While the proposed restrictions would bring it around to where WI. is as far as regulations. I think it was poor judgement by the RGS to place their name on it. Also there is one but case that is a member in WI. That's pressing to ban ALL body grip traps on dry land no matter the size.

From: Zinger
10-May-15
If I used dogs for grouse hunting I would want to do whatever possible to make sure that my dog didn't get caught and killed in a connibear. I don't think that makes me anti-trapping.

From: Drop Tine
10-May-15
More dogs are killed by wolves each year than killed in traps. With current regulations for trap sizes and set backs. unless you grouse hunt with a chihuahua there is nothing to fear. Illegal sets are a problem but you can't regulate illegal.

From: razorhead
10-May-15
DT is absolutely correct, I hunt grouse hard, and for a lot of years, never had a dog, caught in a trap

From: Zinger
10-May-15
I assume your talking about Wisconsin laws with set back, trap size, etc not Minnesota laws. It sounds like they want Minnesota laws to be pretty much the same as WI laws to protect the dogs.

  • Sitka Gear